> does anyone have any experiences with --or strong arguments against--
> automatic, daily merges to keep a derived (feature) branch
> automagically in sync with a parent (main) branch? The key word is
> "automatic" here... manual merges aren't the issue.
>
> I can come up with a list of arguments pro and contra automatic
> merges, but I'm curious about the SVN community's experience or
> opinion.
>
> Thanks for any feedback; I will try to repost a summary/common opinion
> back to this list.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Jochem
>
> P.S. Background info: we're investigating this in the company I work
> for. I've got mixed feelings about the desirability and feasibility of
> this, but I'm open to change my opinion.

I feel that merges have to be done by a person, not an unattended
script. How would a script know if the software still works after the
merge? How would it resolve the conflicts that will on occasion occur?
These tasks require human thought to complete.